Comair CRJ Diverts b/c of Cracked Windshield
09-22-2009, 03:04 PM
#21
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Dec 2008
Position: RJ driver
Posts: 320
They aren't carrying fuel in the back. They are carrying families. It is best to land and figure out what to do from the ground.
09-23-2009, 01:10 PM
#23
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Feb 2007
Position: FO
Posts: 3,044
The weather was pretty much crap everywhere that day, T-storms and rain throughout the whole country east of the Mississippi. Continuing with the cracked windshield would have required flying at 10k the rest of the way. With the wx (extensive diverting probably required, I know it was when we ferried the plane back that afternoon) and the reduced max altitude it would require more fuel than they likely brought. Not to mention a crappy ride for everyone on board. So what if they erred on the side of caution and diverted. Why did you feel the need to question their actions?
09-23-2009, 07:58 PM
#24
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jan 2008
Position: blueJet
Posts: 4,536
As far as armchair quarterbacking, we have...
Loss of life.... nope
Serious Injuries... nope
Hull loss... nope
Additional airframe damage... nope
CRJ at bottom of Lake Pontcairn... nope
Popped window shards raining down onto daycare playground... nope
Lost Jeppesen charts littering Tennessee/Mississippi countryside... nope
Messed shorts... maybe (x2)
37 Inconvenienced passengers Twittering everyone about their exciting day... yes
I don't think they made a bad decision. Kudos to the crew.
09-28-2009, 11:15 AM
#25
On Reserve
Joined APC: Oct 2007
Position: CRJ-700 FO
Posts: 13
I did this at 410 in a CRJ-700. Captains side window core ply if I remember correctly. It sounded like a very loud pop. Our procedure at ASA called from reducing the deferential pressure to below 6.2, but did not call for any speed reduction until below 8000. We descended to the upper 20’s and raised the landing elevation to about 5000 so the cabin would stay around that to reduce the deferential pressure. We are able to continue to ATL (about 200 miles) with no problems.
I’m not trying to say this crew should have done anything differently. They didn’t get anyone hurt so there’s no way to say they did anything wrong. I’m just sharing my story.
I’m not trying to say this crew should have done anything differently. They didn’t get anyone hurt so there’s no way to say they did anything wrong. I’m just sharing my story.
09-28-2009, 11:23 AM
#26
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Feb 2007
Position: FO
Posts: 3,044
One thing it says is slow to 205 kts. Which makes it a two hour flight from the Nashville area to MSY. That's a long time to sit there wondering if the crackling sound coming from the glass is getting louder, or if it's just your imagination.
As far as armchair quarterbacking, we have...
Loss of life.... nope
Serious Injuries... nope
Hull loss... nope
Additional airframe damage... nope
CRJ at bottom of Lake Pontcairn... nope
Popped window shards raining down onto daycare playground... nope
Lost Jeppesen charts littering Tennessee/Mississippi countryside... nope
Messed shorts... maybe (x2)
37 Inconvenienced passengers Twittering everyone about their exciting day... yes
I don't think they made a bad decision. Kudos to the crew.
As far as armchair quarterbacking, we have...
Loss of life.... nope
Serious Injuries... nope
Hull loss... nope
Additional airframe damage... nope
CRJ at bottom of Lake Pontcairn... nope
Popped window shards raining down onto daycare playground... nope
Lost Jeppesen charts littering Tennessee/Mississippi countryside... nope
Messed shorts... maybe (x2)
37 Inconvenienced passengers Twittering everyone about their exciting day... yes
I don't think they made a bad decision. Kudos to the crew.
09-28-2009, 11:35 AM
#27
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jun 2007
Position: Legacy FO
Posts: 4,105
I'm not faulting the crew. Seriously I'm not. They did a good job. I was just curious if there was a reasonable way to continue, and based on the pictures and information from others, probably not.
For the person who asked what would cause this, it was likely caused by a windshield anti-ice / heat failure. Looks like one ply within the different layers cracked.
For the person who asked what would cause this, it was likely caused by a windshield anti-ice / heat failure. Looks like one ply within the different layers cracked.
09-28-2009, 07:17 PM
#29
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jan 2008
Position: blueJet
Posts: 4,536
Good to know the why. Ours (Comair's) doesn't say why, it just says to initiate descent (if required), maintain 205kts below 8000', set landing elevation when below 8000', END OF PROCEDURE.
The way I read the QRH, it suggests you should descend to 8000'. This isn't the only place the QRH is poorly written. I guess that's why we have a radio to call dispatch?
The way I read the QRH, it suggests you should descend to 8000'. This isn't the only place the QRH is poorly written. I guess that's why we have a radio to call dispatch?
09-28-2009, 08:00 PM
#30
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Mar 2008
Position: Left
Posts: 251
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
